Amit Yadav @ Amit Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37431 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2026 Thana- SIMRI District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Amit Yadav @ Amit Kumar Yadav S/O Sonelal Yadav R/O Village- Simri,
                 P.S- Simiri, Distt.- Darbhanga.
                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     Shankar Yadav S/O Gorakh Yadav R/O Village- Simri Ward No.-10, P.S.-
                  Simri, Distt.- Darbhanga.
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Baidyanath Prasad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Ms. Gulnar Begum, A.P.P.
                 For the Informant        :        Mr. Kedar Jha, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-06-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of

                   the informant.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),

                   137(2), 96, 352 and 3(5) of the BNS.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

                   alleges that petitioner along with others kidnapped his minor

                   daughter aged about 14 years and also took away jewellery and

                   cash.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37431 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
                                            2/3




          informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the

          allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that

          informant also alleges that the petitioner kidnapped his daughter

          along with jewellery, cash and clothes which he had kept in the

          house for marriage of his daughter. It is, thus, submitted that had

          the daughter of the informant been a minor in that event the

          informant would not have collected cash and jewellery for the

          purposes of marriage. It is next submitted that the victim came

          back and her statement was recorded under Sections 180 and

          183 BNSS and from perusal of the statement of the victim

          recorded under the aforesaid sections, it would manifest that the

          same is diatomic. It is also submitted that in her statement

          recorded under Section 183 BNSS, the victim has said that she

          had gone to Delhi where she married the petitioner which amply

          demonstrates that the victim was not kidnapped.

                       5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State

          and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant

          opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

          Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits

          that a specific allegation is alleged in the FIR that the victim is a

          minor aged about 14 years and in her statement recorded under

          Section 183 BNSS, the victim disclosed her age as 14 years.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37431 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
                                                       3/3




                     Learned counsel further submits that even presuming that the

                     victim and the petitioner, who is a major, were in love whether

                     such relationship could have been acted upon. It is next

                     submitted that consent of a minor is immaterial.

                                  6. At this stage, learned A.P.P. for the State submits

                     that investigation of the case is continuing and if the police will

                     find that petitioner was not involved in the occurrence then final

                     form would be submitted but if it is found that petitioner was

                     involved in the occurrence of kidnapping, the law will take its

                     own course.

                                  7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties

                     and taking into consideration the submissions made by the

                     learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, the Court

                     is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the

                     petitioner in connection with Simri P.S. Case No. 37 of 2026

                     pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

                     Darbhanga/Successor Court.

                                  8. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T